guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Mobile object
After moving the article from "Mobile Objects" to "Mobile object", I noticed that GuildWiki style appears to be to use title caps for article titles (ie, "Article Title of the Captitals" rather than "Article title of the capitals"). I missed this at first since so many of the article titles are proper names of skills, mobs, locations, etc. -- which are capitalized anyway -- but then I noticed Non-Player Character. I'll move this one to Mobile Object to conform with the convention. --Saucepan 11:37, 17 Jun 2005 (EST) :Thanks for pointing this out (a month ago); I just noticed, and am working to fix the problem. See Project talk:Style & formatting. —Tanaric 15:47, 15 Jul 2005 (EST) I find that this link clears up a lot, like the fact that the term's origin is, and forever shal be, in debate. This isn't in response to anything stated here, it's just a good source of information on the term. Mob vs Monster, standardization? I personally perfer to use the term "Mob" over "Monster", since it always feels weird calling computer controlled enemy humans "monsters". While the Game Updates uses the term "Monster", we can use a similar logic against "Ascended Armor" to minimize usage of the term "Monster". That said, we currently have a Template:Monster-stub which uses the term "Monster" instead of "Mob". Even though the wiki recognizes them as meaning the same thing, I still prefer we standardize upon the usage of one. If the decision is to standardize upon Monster instead of Mob, that's fine too. Standardization is more important than my personal preference. -PanSola 07:02, 8 December 2005 (UTC) :Personally, I never use "mob" for a PC. --Fyren 18:09, 8 December 2005 (UTC) ::I don't get your point. Personally, I never use "mob" nor "monster" for a PC... -PanSola 21:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC) ::oops I just realized by "enemy" I meant "computer controlled and attackable", that's where the confusion came from. Edited my original entry. -PanSola 21:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC) :::Hmm, interesting. I've never heard the term "MOB" refer to a "mobile object." Besides that, I prefer the use of "monster" over "mob" when referring to one enemy. Mob generally refers to a "large disorderly crowd or throng," i.e. the mob of inferno imps or a mob of people. In terms of GW, people do use "mob" over "monster" because rarely are monsters solo anyway. Regarding Template:Monster-stub, I prefer using the term "monster." AB in alliance battle it also refers to grp of 8-10ppl --Dunkoro 11:19, 25 September 2007 (CDT) What is the largest mob in the game aside from FoW/UW? well? --68.102.128.17 14:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC) :Largest mob as in most enemies I'd probably say is that Charr quest in Far Shiverpeaks, can't remember the name --Gimmethegepgun 14:55, 4 November 2007 (UTC) Good example This is a great example of the lack of linguistic skills of online players. Hardest hitting Monsters What are the hardest hitting monsters in game. I've heard of Abbysals and Aatxes, but are there other races that can hit very hard? Normal hits Im too tired to think but mursaat hurts pretty bad on uninfused with their spectral agony. ^^ 16:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)